Thursday, January 26, 2006

Here in Vancouvber, Canada our meeting ran over-time. No bomb-threats, no hysterical jihadis storming the citidel, no cause for law suits over spilt coffee. It could have been a disaster. In fact it nearly was a disaster: I went to the store where I buy my clothes, I asked the clerk for a blue scarf, and I got a blank stare in return. Normal enough, but they didn't have any blue scarves either. I am a Blue Revolutionary at this time, and nothing can stop me. I ran home, found an old jumper, and cut a swath through it till I could swear it looked just like the scarf I would have bought anyway. My only concern was the colour, whether it was blue, green or some other shade I can't quite distinguish. I sat with a girl I know, chatted her up till she mentioned that I had people looking at me across the room. Yes, we have made contact. Yes, we're going to do it again.

There is no burning issue here in Vancouver, Canada, not something so immediate that all people are frantic for a solution or at least a crowd to shout to. And yet, there we were at the People's Temple, at McDonalds. We did not meet the numbers of our friends at the rally in Paris. Not yet. We did meet well into over-time, and we will meet again. We will grow and we will make a difference. Here are a couple of letters from others, and I'll update anything else that comes in as it comes.

At 8:27 PM, Jauhara said...

Sacre Bleu! Vive la révolution bleue...où puis-je joindre? Pardon my French, but this gives me hope! Go France!

At 9:32 PM, t-ham said...

I sat, for 2 hours, resplendent in my new blue scarf, in a McDonalds 35 miles from 9/11's Ground Zero, a place where, on that day, you could have climbed any of the hills that rise up here along the Hudson River and watched the Towers burn and crumble as I did, a place where everyone lost a family member or friend or knows someone who did.

No one came.

Other obligations? Insufficient notice? Lousy time of day? Apathy? Fear?

Maybe I counted too much on the blogs. Maybe I overestimated how many of us reading and commenting. Maybe we just seem like many. Maybe, 'round here, I am one of the Tiny Majority Who Have Hijacked the...what?

This will take some thinking. This is going to take some planning. They should have come. I am a stubborn son of a bitch, and now they have gone and pissed me off.
I'm not going away.

Here in Vancouver we found friends willing to make the effort. We'll do more. So will others. The French will carry on, and so will we. We can change the world doing this. Unlike our Muslim cousins, we can do good things.

What Are You So Shocked About?

January 26, 2006
By Ibn Iblis

World Shocked at HAMAS Victory, the headline reads.

As the preeminent Israeli politician and diplomat Abba Eban famously said, "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." The Palestinians have chosen the "all-or-nothing" route, a slap in the mouth of Bush's ridiculous road map to peace. That the Palestinians would have no part in a two-state solution became evident long before this election, and thus the question that begs be asked is: haven't you people been paying attention?

As if decades of terrorism and murder were not proof enough, the final nail in the Palestinian coffin should have been at Camp David more than 5 years ago. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak requested that Clinton call the meeting, feeling that it was important to show that Israel was committed to the Peace Process and that Israel was ready to make the necessary concessions. Those concessions were so broad that Israelis were furious when they were later reported. These included Israeli redeployment from 95% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, the creation of a Palestinian state in the areas of Israeli withdrawal, removal of isolated settlements and transfer of the land to Palestinian control, other Israeli land exchanged for West Bank settlements remaining under Israeli control, Palestinian control over East Jerusalem, including most of the Old City, and "Religious Sovereignty" over the Temple Mount.

In return Arafat had to declare an "end of conflict" and agree that no further claims on Israel could be made in the future. Arafat rejected the proposal without further negotiation and returned to West Bank to initiate the second intifadah several weeks later. Sadly, despite this turn of events, the Palestinian cause lived on.

Those of us paying attention also remember the 2002 poll showing that a large majority - nearly seven out of 10 Palestinians - supported the suicide operations, with a full 60% "strongly" supporting them. In that same poll 51% of Palestinians viewed the eradication of the state of Israel as a goal of the intifadah. Again, as the date of the poll suggests, the attitudes of the majority of Palestinians toward peaceful co-existance with the state of Israel have been common knowledge for years.

And still the bulk of the outrage is directed at HAMAS itself, as if they somehow fooled the Palestinian people into voting for an organization that features as its platform the intent to destroy the state of Israel. "The whole of the international community has the responsibility to accept the outcome of any fair and democratic election. But in this case Hamas has a clear responsibility to understand that with democracy goes a rejection of violence," said British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. Clearly this is not true. The Palestinian people overwhelmingly advocate violence and proved so by electing a violent, genocidal jihadist organization to a landslide victory. "You cannot have one foot in politics and another in terror," said US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice. Was she talking to HAMAS or to the Palestinian people? Duplicity has been a staple of Palestinian diaspora for many, many years. It's quite useless to start criticising HAMAS now, and especially useless to expect them to reject a key part of the platform they were elected on. Democracy has been a pillar of the administration's foreign policy in the wake of 9-11; the harsh reality of this election is be careful what you wish for.

The facade between jihad apologists and deniers and reality is now set ablaze. It is certainly now true and apparent that the jihadists in Palestine represent an overwhelming majority of "extremists". Those Muslims in the West, particularly in America, who claim to be part of the majority of moderates, are now presented with a predicament: do they abandon the Palestinian cause in the face of their overwhelming mandate to jihad terror, or do they openly and honestly side with HAMAS the way they've been doing behind closed doors all along? No longer can "moderate" Muslims create separation between their support for the Palestinian cause and support for HAMAS, since the Palestinian people have, with their votes, declared their causes one and the same.

This will no longer be lost on Americans who were once fooled into thinking Palestinians just want to be left alone to themselves. This week they voted for jihad. As executive director of the Jewish American Congress Neil Goldstein said, the charade is over.

Tuesday, January 24, 2006

Sunday, January 22, 2006